Friday, June 17, 2011

The Trinity and our salvation

“The
ultimate end of the whole divine economy is the entry of God’s creatures into
the perfect unity of the Blessed Trinity.” (CCC 260) This is the salvation of
man: The everlasting enjoyment of the Most Holy Trinity. Thus, the dogma of the
Trinity is no mere theoretical exercise of academia, but is rather most intimately
united with man’s fulfillment and happiness.

Still,
we know that man’s nature does not demand the revelation of the Trinity – for the
revelation of God is supernatural and entirely exceeds the demands of nature.
Hence, it would be possible for man to be fulfilled and perfectly happy on a
natural level without attaining to the vision of the Blessed Trinity, without coming
to the beatific vision of the Divine Essence. Still, salvation proper (i.e. the
supernatural salvation gained through the gift of grace) necessitates the
vision of God as he is, the Most Holy Trinity.

A
brief consideration of how the Trinity is our salvation, will prepare us for
the upcoming solemnity of Trinity Sunday.

Perfect natural happiness
does not require the revelation of the Trinity

For
man to be completely and perfectly fulfilled according to his nature, there is
no need for God to reveal himself as Trinity. It is true that man cannot be
happy, cannot have natural perfection without the contemplation of the Divine
Essence – and, hence, natural happiness cannot be attained without a natural union
with God (i.e. to know and love God by man’s own natural powers, rather than by
the theological virtues). Always, and in every hypothetical or possible world,
man’s happiness is in knowing and loving God; but this union with God need not
be a supernatural union.

Perfect
natural happiness, by very definition, would be natural and not supernatural.
But the revelation of the Trinity is supernatural and beyond the natural powers
of man. Therefore, the revelation of the Trinity would not be required for the
perfection of man’s natural happiness.

However,
God did not will that man should only attain to perfect natural happiness
(though he could have willed this, he did not). Rather, the Lord desires to
elevate man above his nature and to bring him into a supernatural participation
in the life of the Most Holy Trinity. God desires to give himself to man as
Trinity – and this is the life of grace (since sanctifying grace is nothing
other than the indwelling of the Trinity). God desires to receive man into
himself – and this is salvation (since salvation is nothing other
than man’s entrance into the perfect unity of the blessed Trinity).

In
a mystical vision, our Savior spoke of this movement from grace into glory to Blessed
Angela of Foligno: Et postquam ego
collocavi vel pausavi me in te, modo colloca te tu in me vel quiesce tu in me.
“And after I have laid myself in you and rested, likewise lay you yourself in
me and rest in me.”

Supernatural happiness, or
salvation, is the vision of the Divine Essence

Salvation
is nothing other than the vision of the Divine Essence. The supernatural
happiness to which man has been elevated (according to the generous will of
God) is not perfected in the vision of any creature, but only in the vision of
God himself. Having been filled with grace (God’s indwelling in this life),
heaven is the creature's entrance into God in the life to come.

However,
if man’s salvation is the vision of the Divine Essence, how does the Trinity
play a part in this? Is salvation only the vision of God’s unity?

We
turn to the words of St. Gregory of Nazianzus: “I give you but one divinity and
power, existing one in three, and containing the three in a distinct way.
Divinity without disparity of substance or nature, without superior degree that
raises up or inferior degree that casts down. . . the infinite co-naturality of
three infinites. Each person considered in himself is entirely God. . . the
three considered together. . . I have not even begun to think of unity when the
Trinity bathes me in its splendour. I have not even begun to think of the
Trinity when unity grasps me. . .” (Oratio
40, 41; CCC 256)

The
Divine Essence is the three persons together and each of the three persons is
the Divine Essence. The whole God is wholly in the Father, but also the whole
God is wholly in the Son and wholly in the Spirit. The Father is wholly the
whole God, yet so too the Son is wholly the whole God, and likewise the Holy
Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, the Spirit is God; and together they
are one God. There is no fourth reality, no separated substance of the Divine
Essence – rather, the Divine Essence is the Father, and the Son, and the Holy
Spirit (each individually and all together).

Therefore,
the salvation of man is the vision of the Divine Essence, which means the
vision of the Trinity, and of each of the three persons. But this vision is not
a vision of an outsider. Rather, the vision is of one who is deeply immersed in
the Trinitarian life. Heaven is not looking upon the Trinity as something far
away and distant; rather, heaven is the entrance of the creature into God.

The humanity of Christ, the
general resurrection, and the communion of the saints

Salvation
is the vision of the Divine Essence, which is the entrance of the creature into
the blessed life of the Most Holy Trinity. This alone is salvation properly
so-called. Thus, Pope Benedict XII declared in the Dogmatic Constitution Benedictus Deus (1336) that the entirely
pure souls enter heaven and behold the Divine Essence immediately face to face,
by the Divine Essence offering itself to them immediately, uncovered, clear and
open, and that by reason of this vision and of this happiness they are truly
blessed and have eternal life and eternal rest. (Cf. Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma by Ludwig Ott)

However,
we ought not to think that all the rest is left behind. How then is the
humanity of Christ, first of all, related to man’s salvation? The humanity of
Christ is the united instrument of man’s salvation. This nature has been so
assumed by the Divinity as to be personally and hypostatically united to the
Divine Essence in the person of the Word. On this account (i.e. on account of
this union and not on account of its own nature), the sacred humanity of Christ
is to be worshiped and adored by all people through all ages and in all
eternity. Heaven will include the vision (even the material and physical
vision, after the general resurrection) of the humanity of Christ. However,
this vision of Christ’s humanity is not man’s salvation properly so-called,
since we have already seen that salvation proper is not in the vision of any creature, but of the Divine Essence itself.

The
vision of Christ’s humanity is considered to be a part of the “accidental
blessedness of heaven” – i.e. this vision is united to salvation without being
that salvation properly so-called. Hence, according to his humanity, we are
co-heirs with Christ. According to his divinity, Christ is that salvation to
which we have been made heirs. In heaven, we shall see, enjoy, and adore the
humanity of Christ; and this humanity continues to be united to (and remains an
instrument of) our salvation.

Likewise,
the resurrection of the body and the communion of the saints. These are what we
call the “accidental blessedness of heaven.” Especially, when considering the
communion of the saints, we can see that this communion is not salvation
properly so-called, but is a communal sharing in salvation (which is the vision
of the Divine Essence).

God
does not save us simply as individuals, but rather unites us together in the
Church. For this reason, we are not at all surprised to realize that salvation
is not simply the immediate relation of the soul to Blessed Trinity, but this
beatitude is mediated through the humanity of Christ and is shared in the
communion of saints.

Dante’s vision of heaven

It
may sometimes be difficult for some to imagine how the vision of the Divine
Essence could bring about perfect happiness. In this regard, the final canto of the Divine Comedy may give us
some indication of the joy which awaits us, and of how this joy will fulfill
our every desire.

I
offer below the final portion of Canto
XXXIII of the Paradiso, in the translation
of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.

From
that time forward what I saw was greater

Than our discourse, that to such vision
yields,

And yields the memory unto such excess.

Even as
he is who seeth in a dream,

And after dreaming the imprinted passion

Remains, and to his mind the rest returns
not,

Even
such am I, for almost utterly

Ceases my vision, and distilleth yet

Within my heart the sweetness born of it;

Even
thus the snow is in the sun unsealed,

Even thus upon the wind in the light leaves

Were the soothsayings of the Sibyl lost.

O Light
Supreme, that dost so far uplift thee

From the conceits of mortals, to my mind

Of what thou didst appear re-lend a little,

And
make my tongue of so great puissance,

That but a single sparkle of thy glory

It may bequeath unto the future people;

For by
returning to my memory somewhat,

And by a little sounding in these verses,

More of thy victory shall be conceived!

I think
the keenness of the living ray

Which I endured would have bewildered me,

If but mine eyes had been averted from it;

And I
remember that I was more bold

On this account to bear, so that I joined

My aspect with the Glory Infinite.

O grace
abundant, by which I presumed

To fix my sight upon the Light Eternal,

So that the seeing I consumed therein!

I saw
that in its depth far down is lying

Bound up with love together in one volume,

What through the universe in leaves is
scattered;

Substance,
and accident, and their operations,

All interfused together in such wise

That what I speak of is one simple light.

The
universal fashion of this knot

Methinks I saw, since more abundantly

In saying this I feel that I rejoice.

One
moment is more lethargy to me,

Than five and twenty centuries to the emprise

That startled Neptune with the shade of Argo!

My mind
in this wise wholly in suspense,

Steadfast, immovable, attentive gazed,

And evermore with gazing grew enkindled.

In
presence of that light one such becomes,

That to withdraw therefrom for other prospect

It is impossible he e'er consent;

Because
the good, which object is of will,

Is gathered all in this, and out of it

That is defective which is perfect there.

Shorter
henceforward will my language fall

Of what I yet remember, than an infant's

Who still his tongue doth moisten at the
breast.

Not
because more than one unmingled semblance

Was in the living light on which I looked,

For it is always what it was before;

But
through the sight, that fortified itself

In me by looking, one appearance only

To me was ever changing as I changed.

Within
the deep and luminous subsistence

Of the High Light appeared to me three
circles,

Of threefold colour and of one dimension,

And by
the second seemed the first reflected

As Iris is by Iris, and the third

Seemed fire that equally from both is
breathed.

O how
all speech is feeble and falls short

Of my conceit, and this to what I saw

Is such, 'tis not enough to call it little!

O Light
Eterne, sole in thyself that dwellest,

Sole knowest thyself, and, known unto thyself

And knowing, lovest and smilest on thyself!

That
circulation, which being thus conceived

Appeared in thee as a reflected light,

When somewhat contemplated by mine eyes,

Within
itself, of its own very colour

Seemed to me painted with our effigy,

Wherefore my sight was all absorbed therein.

As the
geometrician, who endeavours

To square the circle, and discovers not,

By taking thought, the principle he wants,

Even
such was I at that new apparition;

I wished to see how the image to the circle

Conformed itself, and how it there finds
place;

But my
own wings were not enough for this,

Had it not been that then my mind there smote

A flash of lightning, wherein came its wish.

Here
vigour failed the lofty fantasy:

But now was turning my desire and will,

Even as a wheel that equally is moved,

The
Love which moves the sun and the other stars.

Et postquam ego collocavi vel pausavi me
in te, modo colloca te tu in me vel quiesce tu in me. “And after I have laid myself in you
and rested, likewise lay you yourself in me and rest in me.”

Dioonysius,Without knowing and loving God, contemplating the divine essence on a natural level (in the way of which the Philosopher speaks at the end of his Nic. Ethics), man cannot find even natural happiness.However, this philosophical and natural contemplation is not the supernatural vision which is the gift of glory and true salvation.[the idea of outsider vs. insider is a good analogy for this, so long as we remember it is only an analogy]

To your question: "Could natural happiness really give us true fulfilment?" -- If human nature is a true nature, then it must have an end proportionate to itself. Therefore, if human nature is a true nature, then there must be a natural happiness in proportion to human nature which completely fulfills human nature qua nature.

Yes, man is made for God -- but you must recall that man's nature does not demand a supernatural union with God. Rather, it is by God's infinite goodness that he raises man above his nature (by elevating grace) and brings man to supernatural happiness.If man's nature could only be fulfilled by heaven, then salvation would not be supernatural but only natural -- it would not be part of grace but of nature.

For this reason, we must hold that (at least theoretically, if not actually), man could find perfect natural happiness through a natural contemplation of God (and without revelation).However, since the Fall wounded our nature, this purely natural happiness is no longer attainable, but the grace of God raises us above our pure nature and elevates us to the life of grace.[additionally, we add that man was not created in the state of pure nature, but was created in grace and his natural end was immediately elevated to a supernatural level]

Father, this is wonderful! In reading it, it reminded me of Pope Benedict XVI's encyclical Spe Salvi. I know you will take what I am about to say in the correct way...you make me anxious to die! St. Paul was right - eye has not seen.....

Veronica, I'm sure you've heard of how St. Therese told her mom that she hoped she (i.e. her mother) would soon die! She was thinking exactly what you are ... what a joy it will be to rest in the Most Blessed Trinity for all eternity! +

Father,When you speak of natural happiness (vs supernatural happiness) are you describing what we used to call limbo?

Do you think that a place of natural happiness awaits those who have lived a good human life according to nature but have not known God through no fault of their own? Is it possible that never having contemplated God in this life, we would never be able to withstand the 'fire' of the beatific vision and so some lesser state of natural happiness exists? Is this what Jesus meant by "many mansions"?

momor,There are certainly many connections between the idea of a perfect natural happiness and the possibility of limbo (such that, if one denied that integrity of human nature and the possibility of natural happiness, one would have to deny limbo as well), my article does not speak directly to that question.

I am referring more to the purely hypothetic state of "pure nature" -- as if God had created man entirely outside of any context of grace. The idea of limbo (unlike "pure nature") is not a pure hypothetical, but rests on the notion that (even after the creation of man in grace and the Fall from that grace) it is possible that God would heal the human nature and allow for a certain place of natural happiness.

I will be posting an article for the feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist (June 24) in which I will talk more about the limbus puerorum.For now, I will just say that it cannot be thought of as one of the "many mansions" ... because limbo must be considered as a part of hell, not of heaven.

It seems problematic to say that Heaven consists of "contemplation of the Divine Essence". The Divine Essence is infinite and beyond the grasp of man's comprehension - recall the child (or angel) who told the Blessed Augustine that he could no more comprehend the Trinity than fill the ocean in a little pit of sand. Furthermore, in traditional epistemology (which I do not necessarily accept, but which is the standard scholastic/Thomist teaching), you become what you know (recall Aristotle's "the soul is, in a way, all things"). It is obviously blasphemous to say that we become the Divine Essence; we are divinized by grace and not by nature. In the East, theosis is phrased more in terms of being and divine life than in terms of a "beatific vision", and clearly one cannot BE the Divine Essence - it is something we participate in, through God's energies.

I don't know if there's an equivalent Western phrasing to express the concept of God's "energies" (since they are relational, and "actus purus" usually refers to God's Essence, or act of being). I was arguing about it with my girlfriend (who is a Roman Catholic) once and she pointed out a passage in St. Hildegard where she uses the term "energies", so the term has been used (albeit infrequently) in the West, but I don't think that one can avoid error without employing a distinction of this sort.

I would like to ask you to clarify what you mean when you say "It is true that man cannot be happy, cannot have natural perfection without the contemplation of the Divine Essence – and, hence, natural happiness cannot be attained without a natural union with God (i.e. to know and love God by man’s own natural powers, rather than by the theological virtues)... Perfect natural happiness, by very definition, would be natural and not supernatural."

It seems that you take by granted that there is such a thing as "natural happiness" in knowing God (which you define properly as the end of man).

But Pius X says in Pascendi Dominici Gregis, 37, that "there are Catholics that ... seem to admit that there is in human nature a true and rigorous necessity with regard to the supernatural order-and not merely a capacity or suitability for the supernatural order, such as has at all times been emphasized by Catholic Apologists"

How would you agree your comment with this text of Pope Pius X? I am pretty interested on that since I am studying General Ethics in my Philosophy program and this very question came up.

Could you enlighten this for us? Thanks! Yours in Christ, Br Roger, LC

@Brother Roger,Do stay close to Pascendi! Much wisdom is there.Also, look to Pope Leo XIII -- he brought about the greatest theological renewal of the modern age (in a return to classical Thomism).

When I say "perfect natural happiness", I do not intend that such must necessarily actually exist (personally, I think it does really exist in the children's limbo; but this is not dogma).However, I do believe we must admit it as a hypothetical possibility.

And this is precisely what is implied by Pius X -- for a nature to be a true nature, it must have an end in accord with its capacity. Thus, either we must hold that human nature has a hypothetical "natural happiness" or that human nature demands the supernatural order as its happiness.But it is clear (from Pascendi) that human nature does not demand grace or supernatural happiness ... therefore, there must be some hypothetical state of "pure nature" with a corresponding hypothetical natural happiness.

We must be clear on this point -- God did not need to offer salvation to man, our nature does not demand supernatural happiness. Rather, our nature only demands natural happiness (which is a hypothetical possibility) -- but the good Lord is so generous that he offers us something more, supernatural happiness.

Hope that clears things up a bit!Feel free to email me, if you are looking for more info on this whole subject (my email is on the "contributors" page).